Vashishtha Bhargava, C.J. - (1.) The question referred for our opinion by the learned single Judge is: "Whether an order passed by the Regional Transport Authority on an application under Sub -section (8) of Sec. 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 is appealable to the prescribed authority under Sec. 64 of the Act -
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the judgment of Hon'ble R. S. Pathak, J. which has occasioned this reference in this case. Before us as well as before Hon'ble R. S. Pathak, J. the suggestion made was limited to Clauses (a) and (b) of Sec. 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act so that we are not concerned with the other clauses of Sec. 64.
(3.) It appears to us that so far as Clause (b) of Sec. 04 is concerned it specifically provides for appeals against orders made under Sec. 57 (8). Sec. 57 (8) deals with an application to vary the conditions of any permit by the inclusion of a new route or routes or a new area or, in the case of a stage carriage permit, by increasing the number of services above the specified maximum, or in the case of a contract carriage permit or a public carrier's permit, by increasing the number of vehicles covered by the permit. When such an application is dealt with the Regional Transport Authority can only make two kinds of orders; one can be an order varying the conditions and the other would be an order refusing to vary the conditions. If an order is made varying the conditions, it is very clear that an appeal would lie under Sec. 64 (b) which specifically grants a right of appeal to a person aggrieved by a variation of the conditions of a permit. On the other hand, if an order does not vary any of the conditions of the permit, Clause (b) of Sec. 64 would not apply and no appeal under that provision would lie. It will, of course, be a question of interpretation in each individual case whether a particular order, which is sought to be taken up in appeal, does or does not vary any condition of a permit.;